Khashoggi murder: Saudi crown prince crazy, says US senator19 minutes agoShare this with Facebook Share this with Messenger Share this with Twitter Share this with Email ShareRelated TopicsJamal Khashoggi death

Media captionLindsey Graham: 'There's not a smoking gun, there's a smoking saw'US senators say they are more certain than ever after a private CIA briefing that the Saudi crown prince had a role in the murder of a journalist.

In a blistering attack, Senator Lindsey Graham said he had "high confidence" Mohammed bin Salman was complicit in the killing of Jamal Khashoggi.

The South Carolina Republican described the Saudi royal as "a wrecking ball", "crazy" and "dangerous".

The Saudis have charged 11 people but deny the crown prince was involved.

Where the Saudi prince stands revealedJamal Khashoggi: The story so farWhat did senators say?Members of the Senate's Committee on Foreign Relations did not mince words after the briefing by CIA Director Gina Haspel on Tuesday.

"There is not a smoking gun - there is a smoking saw," Mr Graham said, referring to Khashoggi's alleged dismemberment in the Saudi consulate in Istanbul in October.

The senator said he could not support Saudi Arabia's involvement in the war in Yemen or arms sales to the Saudi government as long as the crown prince remained in power.

Senator Bob Menendez, a New Jersey Democrat, echoed those views.

He said the US must "send a clear and unequivocal message that such actions are not acceptable in the world's stage".

Media captionThe BBC's Frank Gardner looks at what could happen to the man known as MBSAnother senator, Bob Corker, told reporters, using the crown prince's initials: "I have zero question on my mind that the crown prince MBS ordered the killing."

The Tennessee Republican added: "If he was in front of a jury, he would be convicted in 30 minutes. Guilty."

Mr Corker suggested that President Donald Trump had condoned the murder of a journalist by refusing to condemn the Saudi crown prince.

Fellow Republican Senator Richard Shelby of Alabama said: "Now the question is, how do you separate the Saudi crown prince and his group from the nation?"

The Senate is planning to vote on a proposal to end US military support to the Saudi-led coalition fighting in Yemen, after members of both parties advanced the resolution last week.

Senator Chris Murphy, who was not privy to Tuesday's briefing, criticised the Trump administration.

"Not everything needs to be secret," the Connecticut Democrat tweeted.

"If our government knows that Saudi leaders were involved in the murder of a US resident, why shouldn't the public know this?"

✔@ChrisMurphyCT At some point Washington needs to have a good hard talk about the over-classification of information.

Not everything needs to be secret.

For instance, if our government knows that Saudi leaders were involved in the murder of a U.S. resident, why shouldn’t the public know this?

3,16610:29 PM - Dec 4, 2018Twitter Ads info and privacy903 people are talking about thisTwitter Ads info and privacyReportEnd of Twitter post by @ChrisMurphyCTWhat has the CIA said?The CIA has concluded Mohammed bin Salman "probably ordered" the killing of Khashoggi.

The spy agency has evidence he exchanged messages with Saud al-Qahtani, who allegedly oversaw the Saudi reporter's murder.

The CIA director - who has reportedly heard an audio recording of the murder - did not attend a recent congressional briefing by cabinet members, dismaying lawmakers.

The White House denied having a hand in Ms Haspel's conspicuous absence, and the CIA said no one had told Ms Haspel not to attend.

At last week's hearing, Secretary of State Mike Pompeo and Defence Secretary James Mattis told senators there was no direct evidence of the crown prince's involvement in Khashoggi's death.

President Trump has said the CIA findings on the crown prince were not conclusive.

On 20 November he said: "It could very well be that the crown prince had knowledge of this tragic event - maybe he did and maybe he didn't."

Journalist who stepped into a consulate and vanishedJamal Khashoggi in his own wordsWho was Jamal Khashoggi?As a prominent journalist, he covered major stories including the Soviet invasion of Afghanistan and the rise of Osama Bin Laden for various Saudi news organisations.

Image copyrightGETTY IMAGESImage captionJamal Khashoggi had gone to Istanbul to obtain a marriage documentFor decades the US resident was close to the Saudi royal family and also served as an adviser to the government.

But he fell out of favour and went into self-imposed exile in the US last year. From there, he wrote a monthly column in the Washington Post in which he criticised the policies of Mohammed bin Salman, including the war in Yemen.

Sometimes I really have to wonder about this country, the Right side of the equation (which I used to subscribe to) has gone totally nuts. -------------------

In his final days as Wisconsin’s governor, Scott Walker is working with the GOP-controlled state legislature to strip power away from the governor and the attorney general and shift it over to lawmakers.

The motivation for their plan isn’t secret: Walker lost his re-election, and the incoming governor and attorney general are Democrats. The state legislature, however, will remain overwhelmingly Republican.

What Walker and his Republican allies are doing shouldn’t be a surprise. From the time he took office, he has steadily amassed control for the GOP and quietly taken over state functions.

“Scott Walker may be on the way out of office for the first time in a quarter century, but his corrosive brand of politics lives on in his fellow Republicans,” said Scot Ross, the executive director of progressive advocacy group One Wisconsin Now.

I am very disappointed by Trumps weakness on this issue. However as insensitive as it sounds... International relations are more important than the loss of one journalist. You can't let the acts of a few change the course of nations. That being said I don't know what the correct appropriate response to this is.

Donald Trump's troubled charity foundation to shut down3 hours agoShare this with Facebook Share this with Messenger Share this with Twitter Share this with Email ShareImage copyrightAFPImage captionMr Trump and his three eldest children are accused of using it for private and political gainUS President Donald Trump's troubled charity foundation has agreed to close down amid allegations that he and others illegally misused its funds.

The move was announced by the Attorney General of New York State, Barbara Underwood, who will supervise the distribution of its remaining monies.

She has accused Mr Trump and his three eldest children of using it for private and political gain.

The foundation's lawyer accused her of attempting to politicise the matter.

Six legal headaches for Donald TrumpWhat's the deal with the Trump Foundation?This is just one of several legal cases currently swirling around Mr Trump and his family. Others include a wide-ranging special counsel investigation into alleged ties between the Trump campaign and Russia headed by former FBI chief Robert Mueller.

What do prosecutors say?Ms Underwood said the case against Mr Trump and his children Donald Jr, Ivanka and Eric would continue.

In a statement, she said there had been "a shocking pattern of illegality involving the Trump Foundation - including unlawful co-ordination with the Trump presidential campaign, repeated and wilful self-dealing, and much more".

She continued: "This amounted to the Trump Foundation functioning as little more than a chequebook to serve Mr Trump's business and political interests."

ADVERTISEMENT

Under the terms of the deal to shut down the foundation, Ms Underwood said, it could only be dissolved under judicial supervision and could only distribute its assets "to reputable organisations approved by my office".

She added: "This is an important victory for the rule of law, making clear that there is one set of rules for everyone.

"We'll continue to move our suit forward to ensure that the Trump Foundation and its directors are held to account for their clear and repeated violations of state and federal law."

And the Trumps?In a statement to the BBC, Trump Foundation lawyer Alan Futerfas - signatory to the deal closing the foundation - said: "Contrary to the NYAG's [New York Attorney General] misleading statement... the foundation has been seeking to dissolve and distribute its remaining assets to worthwhile charitable causes since Donald J Trump's victory in the 2016 presidential election.

"Unfortunately, the NYAG sought to prevent dissolution for almost two years, thereby depriving those most in need of nearly $1.7m.

"Over the past decade, the foundation is proud to have distributed approximately $19m, including $8.25m of the president's personal money, to over 700 different charitable organisations with virtually zero expenses.

"The NYAG's inaccurate statement of this morning is a further attempt to politicize this matter."

Mr Trump and his eldest children have yet to comment.

Last June, Mr Trump indicated on Twitter that he was not willing to settle the case, insisting the foundation had done nothing wrong.

Donald Trump's charitable foundation is being dismantled, but the headaches it has created for the president aren't going away anytime soon.

According to New York Attorney General Barbara Underwood, her investigation into alleged misconduct could still result in millions of dollars in penalties and sanctions against the president and his three oldest children.

As the Washington Post has reported, Mr Trump frequently used his family foundation - which was funded in large part by outside donations - as a resource to settle business lawsuits and, during the 2016 presidential campaign, as a political tool.

The president has been quick to dismiss the New York investigation into his foundation, but with Tuesday's dissolution deal Ms Underwood's criticisms could have sharper teeth.

At the very least, they are sure to resurface as the 2020 presidential election approaches.

How did this come about?The state's lawsuit against the Trump Foundation was announced over the summer after a two-year investigation which began under previous New York Attorney General Eric Schneiderman.

In October 2016 Mr Schneiderman ordered the Trump Foundation to stop fundraising in New York, after finding it had no proper registration.

President-elect Trump vowed to shut the charitable foundation down in December 2016, to avoid "even the appearance" of any conflict of interest.

What are the specific allegations?A 41-page document filed with the New York Supreme Court by the attorney general's office in June 2018 spells out a range of alleged violations of laws concerning non-profit organisations dating back more than a decade.

Mr Trump, who has not contributed any personal funds to the foundation since 2008, was the sole signatory on the foundation's bank accounts and approved all of its grants.

Several pages of the document focus on a charity fundraiser for veterans in Iowa in January 2016, which Mr Trump chose to hold instead of taking part in a TV debate with other Republican presidential hopefuls ahead of the influential state's caucuses.

More than $2.8m was donated to the Trump Foundation at that event. The petition alleges that those funds raised from the public were used to promote Mr Trump's campaign for the presidency, in particular in the Iowa nominating caucuses.

The lawsuit also claims that the foundation paid $100,000 to settle legal claims against Mr Trump's Mar-a-Lago resort; $158,000 to settle claims against one of his golf clubs; and $10,000 to purchase a painting of Mr Trump to hang at another of his golf clubs.

You cannot post new topics in this forumYou cannot reply to topics in this forumYou cannot delete your posts in this forumYou cannot edit your posts in this forumYou cannot create polls in this forumYou can vote in polls in this forum